[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: haskell-debian vs. newest HaXml



Hi,

Am Donnerstag, den 10.09.2009, 15:28 -0500 schrieb Jeremy Shaw:
> > I wouldn’t call the issue big, but it definitely is an issue: Two
> > packages going through main, proper buildd queuing to be taken care of
> > etc. I’m happy to see Extra in Debian once there is actually code  
> > shared
> > by several packages in it, of course. For now, I’d appreciate if you’d
> > copy the functions over. It will definitely speed up inclusion in
> > Debian.
> 
> Moving the required code from Extra has proven more difficult than  
> expected. Originally I was thinking it was only 6-8 lines. But it  
> turned out that those functions depend on other functions in Extra,  
> and so now there is a lot of code I had to copy in.
> 
> Then, to make things worse, some of the code includes a type class and  
> some instances. The problem is there are other libraries (haskell- 
> debian-repo and autobuilder) that depend on that type class and want  
> to integrate with the code in haskell-debian that depends on that type  
> class. But, that does not work, because the copy of the type class in  
> the haskell-debian package is different than the version that lives in  
> Extra.
> 
> This seems like a lot of hackery for the sole purpose of avoiding the  
> addition of a single library to the debian repository. I know how to  
> make everything compile again, but it means that people who want to  
> depend on the CIO type class need to depend on the Debian library,  
> even though CIO has nothing to do with the Debian library, aside from  
> the fact that the Debian library uses it.
> 
> What would I need to do if I wanted to instead get Extra into debian,  
> and leave haskell-debian alone?

If it’s that much hassle, I guess that is a good reason to package Extra
separately and on it’s own. I wanted to avoid having an extra package
for 6-8 lines that are trivial to extract. If it is more work, then it’s
ok to package Extra.

I am a bit worried about the rather generic name, but not too much. I
guess there just is no good, more descriptive term for the library?

Greetings,
Joachim
-- 
Joachim "nomeata" Breitner
Debian Developer
  nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C
  JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil


Reply to: